verse_and_dimensionsfandomcom-20200214-history
User blog:FireyDeath4/What Nothing Actually Is
Nothing is the word for what is actually "" - null. When anyone talks about "nothing", they mean that there are no things of the Box selected, so it is effectively what they call "nothing". As a matter of fact, there is no such thing as "nothing". People have been confusing "the nothing itself" and "no things in question" as the same, with the word "nothing". This is about as inaccurate as when Cary and Michael Haung "proved" that everything right is wrong and vice versa, when they used a word with two definitions to their advantage (even though "correct" and "right" have nothing to do with each other). (Still, they're two pretty stupid people, so, that's OK. They also overdo it with cleverness.) This is because even the "Nothing" is a thing. Even a null is a thing, as well as nullification. When anyone says "nothing doesn't exist", they are partly right, because no thing doesn't exist. Everything exists. To tell the truth, EVERY exists, thing or not. However, you may get the wrong idea if they are talking directly about Nothing, because there are infinite Nothings in the Box. So when they say "nothing doesn't exist", that's not true. They really mean "every, thing or not, exists" or "all exists, part of "all" or not". Nothing is beyond explanation, which is why I'm writing this. But as I said before, this is wrong. It's possible to explain any Nothing (look, I'm doing it right now!). What I mean is, "every explainable or unexplainable thing or not a thing is within explanation". It's not possible to create nothing (but it IS possible to create a Nothing), because everything is in the Box. You can't take away the Box, because no-one has the power to create, destroy and generally screw with maths. The True God has been nullified and disqualified from his position of true omnipotence by my foretold explanation which I believe I can quickly rehash: He created everything, including logic, maths and time. Without any of those things to begin with, he would have nothing. Omnipotence just wouldn't be a thing. I didn't even mention how the Box was eternal, timeless and infinite. In fact, it isn't even a box. It's an endless flune that can hold all types of maths, logic and dislogic that are arbitrary of position - in other words, it's the epitamy of maths, logic and basically all types of existence. As a matter of fact, nonexistence doesn't exist (except in subsections of the Box that don't actually have everything). I could have already corrected everything in the real article about Nothing by now, but to rephrase it more accurately: Nothing doesn't exist. Every and all exists in some way, all or part of "all" and/or "things" or not. Nothing can't exist. There always must be something, even if the Nothing is part of it. Nothing can't be explained once you have an infinite level of intellect - this includes any of/or the Nothing, which I am even explaining right now with my finite, retarded, mortal, primitive, meme-knowing, non-original, procrastinating, autistic and stupid brain. Nothing can't be sorted into a group. Every and all can, all or part of "all" and/or "things" or not. Nothing actually ISN'T beyond paradoces (except for things that are insufficiently intellectual inanimate insanity, which includes the Nothing), because I can resolve just about any paradox (or at least find out what actually happens). Null exists, and it can be talked about, yet it's pretty equivalent to Nothing as it has no location and no form. But saying, in the sense of no thing, "nothing can't be talked about" is false. Even a real null can have something said about it, but that would mean "not nothing can't be talked about", meaning "something can't be talked about", and there isn't a single thing in the Box that has this illogical property. In fact, I just made my own paradox! #notnotnotnot...notnothingcan'tbetalkedabout But anyway, as for the resolution to this paradox, it's structured like the Liar's Paradox, yet it doesn't have the same solution as you can't simply make the statement both true and false; a superposition. Yes, nothing is in a superposition of being existent and nonexistent, but this doesn't apply to anything, because anything is not Nothing (unless you're talking about the Nothing). To resolve, just know that there is not a thing that can't have anything said about it. This is the real resolution, because it doesn't actually say "nothing". Nothing can exist. It's not logical to say "nothing doesn't exist" or "everything is nothing", because the Nothing does. What Nothing actually is is a thing. It's just that it's no thing. So you could say it's a 0 thing. 0 IS a thing. (This does not nullify 0 from being a position, as aforementioned in a comment I posted. It's simply the perfectly average point in a hyperflune of hypercomplex numbers.) Last but not least, plz don't confuse the Nothing with "no thing at all" anymore on this Wikia. -FireyDeath4 Category:Blog posts